stexpandedfandomcom-20200214-history
Talk:USS Kongo (NCC-1710)
Please excuse the question, but doesn't this interfere with what has been shown of the Kongo's fate in Starship Exeter? --JusticeCEO 12:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC) Hence the note about continuity. Should it be more prominent? This sort of thing is going to happen when different fan sources interact. If someone wants to note the Exeter continuity they should do so as "Exeter continuity".Tesral 16:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC) :I think it would be a good idea to put the continuity not at the top instead of the bottom, but that's just me. --JusticeCEO 18:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC) So what is the style here? Where does the continuity notice go when there is a conflict of sources? Mod types? Opinions? This will happen more and more as the database builds. Tesral 18:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC) :Usually the style is to not what continutity you are talking about at the beginning of any section that may be contradictory. That way people always know what aspect you are talking about. Another option is to create a seperate page, such as "USS Kongo (NCC-1710) (Epiphany)", should the amount of information warrant it. Not being a Mod or an Admin, I can't tell you officially, but that just what I observed. Of course, at least in my mind, if something in my stories requires a minor change to fit with something another group has done, I'll make the change rather than openly contradict the other group. Not that I know what the Epiphany requirements are for the Kongo, just an observation. --JusticeCEO 12:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC) Like I said, if someone wishes to add the Exeter viewpoint they should. I'll leave it to someone that knows it. It is hardly an "I'm right and you're wrong" deal. AISI the Wiki deal is to at least respect what others have done, not always the case as I have already seen. To add to that comment I don't see one fan source as superior to another. I am not familar with the "Starship Exeter" work. I see no need to have multiple entries the reader must chase down. "Starship Exeter" should add in its own history. Might I suggest alphabetical order. I'll gladly have my entry live under "Starship Avalon" should such exist. Tesral 22:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC) :That sounds quite workable to me. I, also, don't see one source as any better than another but I don't like to purposely tread on someone else's toes, either. ;-) I'm sure that someone that knows the Exeter story better than I do would be willing to add the appropriate information. --JusticeCEO 20:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC) Well, I didn't know the Exeter stuff when I started doing mine. Hard to tread on toes you are unaware of. I might say they tread on mine, as I have been playing with the Kongo as my ship since the 70s. However it would be bad form and I will not. It's a matter of no matter. As long as my fandon is respected I have no problem with theirs, and I would hope that respect is universal. A universal shared universe is not going to happen. On the TrekCreative forum we have a simple way of saying it. YBYW. Your Board Your Wave. It means I respect your creative decision, but I'll do it my way. It's a mailing list of ten or so cranky creative types and about 90 lurkers. We have no shared universe. Jay Hailey and I have some parallel evolution between the two of us. I have written some things in ST-OM and he has added to Epiphany Trek. They are however, not the same. If we can respect each other's Treks, anyone can. Tesral 21:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC) Cut from name background :Not really sure this belongs in the main article. -- 01:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC) The vajra was originally the thunderbolt of the god Indra. Later in esoteric, Tantric, or vajrayona Buddhism, the vajra symbolized supernatual powers that could be obtained through esoteric rituals. In the sexual symbolism of Tantrism, the vajra was also associated with the male organ. On the other hand, kongo could also mean a jewel or a diamond, or hard as a diamond. So, appropriately, Kongo as the name of a ship could imply the great power of a thunderbolt or the hardness of a diamond. :Why not? It is part and parcel of the name's history. Yes, I'm putting it back. Tesral 03:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC) ::Well, here's how it looks to me: Saying it was named after a mountain in Japan is fine (even though it differs from the Roddenberry reason for including it as a tip of the hat to African heritage). But a history of vajra, vajrayona and all that? And "Kongo as the name of a ship could imply" comes across as purely speculative ("could imply"). Encyclopedic articles typically go by established facts, after the fact, not speculation, or irrelevant material. The vajra material is interesting, but not directly relevant, hence why I moved it to this discussion page, where it can stay, for those who may be interested in it. ::So unless you can come up with a pretty convincing reason for its inclusion in the article, other than your own satisfaction, I'm taking it out. -- 03:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC) You just proved why it should be there. The name is Kongo, not Congo. Congo is a river in Africa, Kongo is a mountain in Japan. I refer you to page 165 of The Making of Star Trek. The name is "Kongo" with a K right under a paragraph speaking of adding a Japanese ship to the list. No African heritiage is mentioned in any of the memos quoted. Pity, it would have been an excellent idea. Kongo is the name of a Japanese Battleship for which one of the Constitution class ships was named. These are establised facts, real world facts in fact. Fine, I'll change "could" to "would". Nice declaritive sentence. The Sanskrit words that confuse you are describing the history of the name and the term Kongo. Knowledge is good. New thoughts stretch the mind. It is paragraphs like your previous one that tell me the historical information is truly needed. Japanese, not African. A USS Unbuntu would be an excellent idea. I recently added one to the STB-600 game which is part of the Epiphany Trek universe. I also suggest you let someone else deal with this conflict please.Tesral 04:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC) :I looked at the page (165), and you're right, that does seem to be the implication (although not explicitly stated). It's just that I remember seeing somewhere, years ago, that it was a reference to Congo in Africa, which has also been spelled with a K. Perhaps whoever made that inference was misinformed. But, regardless, that's not really what I'm debating. I'm saying the inclusion of vajra, Indra, et al., doesn't seem particularly relevant to the ship itself. 04:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC) It is telling you what the sound "kong goh" means in reference to the name and the ship. BTW the other reference is relevant as well. The kongos are a bantu people living along the Congo river. "Kongo" refers to only one person. Ergo if I was naming a ship for these people it would the USS Kongos, not kongo singular. It would be like calling a ship the USS Irishman. Indeed it is totally reasonable to have a ship of each name, Kongo, and Kongos. the meanings are totally different. We are dealing with words that are not English. I believe that the cultural relevance of those words is important if we are truly to understand more than the mere sounds. The vajra was the thunderbolt of the god Indra, a principle god of the Hindu religion. The Hindu version of Zeus' thunderbolts if you will. "Kongo" is how the Japanese pronounced it. From all the given evidence it is indeed a reference to the Japanese ship, named for the Mountain named for the thunderbolt of the god Indra. A few bytes for some cultural relevance will hurt no one, and they might learn something. Consider it a blow against the rising tide of cultural ignorance. The Great Bird would approve. Tesral 05:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC) :..a blow against the rising tide of cultural ignorance. I LIKE THAT! Should we get a "member quote" of the month page? :-) -- 18:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC) It would hurt no one, and they might learn something. :) BTW: Who added the Kanji? It's a nice touch, but I would put the "Kongo-zan" back as well. Most of us don't read kanji, myself included. Tesral 20:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC) :Okay, well I have been 'brought in' to judge this article and I think the whole background information on the ship's name is not needed. A few lines maybe, but not paragraphs. I'm sorry Tesral, but this is a Star Trek wiki and the article is about a starship, not a detailed article about the origin of it's name. As for the differing continuities, I would rather not have seperate articles about the same ship, but rather different paragraphs inside one article. I'll leave it up to those more knowledgeable about the Exeter continuity, however. --Luke80 21:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC) By all means, let the tide rise. I'm done. Tesral 01:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC) :Your way or the highway, as ever, eh, Garry? And to think I was getting nostalgic for TCR. --TimPendragon 03:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC) :Is not now, nor ever has been the case. I'm simply one of the crackpots that noodles about people in pajamas playing startship. You will include or not include yourself as you see fit. Tesral 17:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)